qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
	Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7] x86: Rework KVM-defaults compat code, enable kvm_pv_unhalt by default
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 11:15:57 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <fddffbab-7aab-72b4-f42f-d18e94517350@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <765f7133-0ccc-2239-d49b-55d8b2a24cc7@redhat.com>

On 10/09/2017 09:39 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 06/10/2017 23:52, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
>> This series enables kvm_pv_unhalt by default on pc-*-2.11 and
>> newer.
>>
>> To do that, I first reworked the existing
>> x86_cpu_change_kvm_default() logic to use compat_props instead,
>> so we don't need to make the chain of pc_compat_*() functions
>> grow.
> I've discussed PV spinlocks with some folks at Microsoft for a few weeks
> now, and I'm not 100% sure about enabling kvm_pv_unhalt by default.
> It's probably a good idea overall, but it does come with some caveats.
>
> The problem is that there were two different implementations of fair
> spinlocks in Linux, ticket spinlocks and queued spinlocks.  When
> kvm_pv_unhalt is disabled, ticket spinlocks sucked badly indeed; queued
> spinlocks however simply revert to unfair spinlocks, which loses the
> fairness but has the best performance.  See virt_spin_lock in
> arch/x86/include/asm/qspinlock.h.
>
> Now, fair spinlocks are only really needed for large NUMA machines.
> With a single NUMA node, for example, test-and-set spinlocks work well
> enough; there's not _much_ need for fairness in practice, and the
> paravirtualization does introduce some overhead.
>
> Therefore, the best performance would be achieved with kvm_pv_unhalt
> disabled on small VMs, and enabled on large VMs spanning multiple host
> NUMA nodes.
>
> Waiman, Davidlohr, do you have an opinion on this as well?

I agree. Using unfair lock in a small VM is good for performance. The
only problem I see is how do we define what is small. Now, even a
machine with a single socket can have up to 28 cores, 56 threads. If a
VM has up to 56 vCPUs, we may still want pvqspinlock to be used.

Is the kvm_pv_unhalt flag a global one for all VMs within a machine? Or
can it be different for each VM? We may want to have this flag
dynamically determined depending on the configuration of the VM.

Regards,
Longman

  reply	other threads:[~2017-10-09 15:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-10-06 21:52 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7] x86: Rework KVM-defaults compat code, enable kvm_pv_unhalt by default Eduardo Habkost
2017-10-06 21:52 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/7] qemu-doc: Document minimum kernel version for KVM in x86_64 Eduardo Habkost
2017-10-09 13:40   ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-10-10 15:33     ` Eduardo Habkost
2017-10-06 21:52 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/7] target/i386: x86_cpu_expand_feature() helper Eduardo Habkost
2017-10-06 21:52 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/7] target/i386: Use global variables to control KVM defaults Eduardo Habkost
2017-10-06 21:52 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/7] kvm: Define KVM_FEAT_* even if CONFIG_KVM is not defined Eduardo Habkost
2017-10-06 21:52 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/7] target/i386: Handle kvm_auto_* compat in x86_cpu_expand_features() Eduardo Habkost
2017-10-06 21:52 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 6/7] pc: Use compat_props to control KVM defaults compatibility Eduardo Habkost
2017-10-06 21:52 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 7/7] target/i386: Enable kvm_pv_unhalt by default Eduardo Habkost
2017-10-09 14:40   ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-10-09 14:43     ` Alexander Graf
2017-10-09 13:39 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7] x86: Rework KVM-defaults compat code, enable " Paolo Bonzini
2017-10-09 15:15   ` Waiman Long [this message]
2017-10-09 15:47     ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-10-10 15:50       ` Eduardo Habkost
2017-10-10 18:07         ` Waiman Long
2017-10-10 19:41           ` Eduardo Habkost
2017-10-11 20:19             ` Waiman Long
2017-10-13 19:01               ` Eduardo Habkost
2017-10-13 20:58                 ` Waiman Long
2017-10-13 23:56                   ` Eduardo Habkost
2017-11-07 11:21                     ` [Qemu-devel] [libvirt] " Paolo Bonzini
2017-11-08 20:07                       ` Eduardo Habkost

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=fddffbab-7aab-72b4-f42f-d18e94517350@redhat.com \
    --to=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
    --cc=imammedo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).